Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

[El Leone]

Saw it last night, found it disappointing.

[Bydo]

Saw it last Friday - totally agree with people's comments here - it just didn't deliver!

Hell, you know what, put me down for a Blu-ray when it comes out all the same.

Don't think that Alex from the Apprentice liked it either, as much to the delight of my girlfriend, he was in the cinema with us.

[bash]

Don't think that Alex from the Apprentice liked it either, as much to the delight of my girlfriend, he was in the cinema with us.

I guess that means he got fired at some point then?

[rmoxon]

I liked this to be honest. The dialogue was perhapse a bit lacking and a lot of the action sequences were retreads of previous indy movies only with added

->Open Spoiler<-

Alien silliness

But it was well made, and fun enough over all.

The fact is that even though it wasnt spectacularly original, there was nothing really bad about it either. Its basicaly just another Indy movie, and IMO there is nothing wrong with that.

[Brats]

It isn't though. The previous three movies were all:

• Heroic - there was very little herosim in this film - success was more by accident than by design
• Full of real stunts - Where's the excitement when it's all been filmed in a blue room?
• Based around some ancient artifact that exists in scripture or folklore
• Gory for a film that can be seen by children - whether it be melting faces, exploding heads, people getting minced by stone rollers or having their hearts pulled out - a bit of CG fire in the eyes is rubbish by comparison
• Well paced
• Set in the thirties, with a real nasty baddy in the Nazis. The fifties and the Russians just isn't the same for an Indy film.
• Not full of plot holes
• Not full of CG

This isn't an Indy film. There are three Indy films and one spin off ala Caravan of Courage that will probably be disowned in a few years time.

[rmoxon]

It isn't though. The previous three movies were all:

• Heroic - there was very little herosim in this film - success was more by accident than by design
• Full of real stunts - Where's the excitement when it's all been filmed in a blue room?
• Based around some ancient artifact that exists in scripture or folklore
• Gory for a film that can be seen by children - whether it be melting faces, exploding heads, people getting minced by stone rollers or having their hearts pulled out - a bit of CG fire in the eyes is rubbish by comparison
• Well paced
• Set in the thirties, with a real nasty baddy in the Nazis. The fifties and the Russians just isn't the same for an Indy film.
• Not full of plot holes
• Not full of CG

This isn't an Indy film. There are three Indy films and one spin off ala Caravan of Courage that will probably be disowned in a few years time.

Umm, Well I completely disagree, as i said the only real negative thing about the film IMo is that it tries to do what has been done before in the series.

The indy films have never been about Heroism, infact i remember my Ex actualy telling me she hated them becuase she finds every character in them to be "selfish and nasty". You could actualy argue that this film has MORE heroism if anything, as they set out to save someone as apposed to just trying to find an artifact at the start of the story.

Stunts are stunts where ever you do them. but most of them were NOT done on a bluescreen anyway. The producers even made a big deal while they were making the film about how it was being made mostly the old fashion way.

Crystal Skulls really do exist and the mythology presented in the movie is near enough correect, but just as unproven as that of the holy grail or power of the Ark. Get your facts stright before you complain about a film.

I agree it wasnt gory, but I didnt really see anywhere where it seemed like it had been tamed down for kids.

As for pacing, I think you should go back and watch The Temple Of Doom again, I think you will find this is much better paced than that. In fact as much as I like temple of doom (still my least favorite of the four mind) its pretty much a mess.

There were plot holes?

And there was like two obvious CGI shots/sequences in the movie... both were pretty well done imo.

Did you even see this film?

[Matt]

There were plot holes?

Come on you can't be serious?!?!

[rmoxon]

Come on you can't be serious?!?!

umm, yes.... are you?

[Daragon]

It isn't though. The previous three movies were all:

• Heroic - there was very little herosim in this film - success was more by accident than by design
• Full of real stunts - Where's the excitement when it's all been filmed in a blue room?
• Based around some ancient artifact that exists in scripture or folklore
• Gory for a film that can be seen by children - whether it be melting faces, exploding heads, people getting minced by stone rollers or having their hearts pulled out - a bit of CG fire in the eyes is rubbish by comparison
• Well paced
• Set in the thirties, with a real nasty baddy in the Nazis. The fifties and the Russians just isn't the same for an Indy film.
• Not full of plot holes
• Not full of CG

This isn't an Indy film. There are three Indy films and one spin off ala Caravan of Courage that will probably be disowned in a few years time.

And what spinoff was that? Other than some books and the Young Indy TV show, there wasn't anything else.

[Dogg Thang]

No, he's talking about this film.

And plot holes? The film was full of them. There was a list of a few earlier (possibly by Brats).

[rmoxon]

I wouldnt worry his post seemed to have been written in some drug enduced stupor. None of it made much sense to me.

How would you even do an Indiana Jones spin off? are any of the other characters intresting enough besides

->Open Spoiler<-

possibley his son, now we know he has one

?.

[rmoxon]

No, he's talking about this film.

And plot holes? The film was full of them. There was a list of a few earlier (possibly by Brats).

Well I cant be bothered going back and finding it, though i did just check out moviemistakes.com

Crystal skull has 68 listed mistakes so far, though only three of them are said to be plot holes.

Raiders of the lost ark has 99 mistakes, and it has alot more than 3 plot holes.

Course its a new movie, so maybe more will be posted in time for crystal skull, but seems like no matter how many mistakes it has, I'm guessing that fact alone cant make it any worse than the other movies.

Last crusade has 160 mistakes apparently.

[Dogg Thang]

It's quality, not quantity that counts. For example, did you not wonder how Indy and Broadbent got their jobs back?

[Daragon]

Oh lol, I thought he meant an ACTUAL spin-off, you know, like Caravan of Courage was an ACTUAL spin-off of Star Wars and not an official part of the canon (as far as I know)

[rmoxon]

I actualy thought he got a different job or somthing, but never throught that hard about it to be honest. But then I can't even remember why he lost it in the first place.

But anyway Indy movies have always been basicaly comic book films anyway, right down to him having almost two seperate indetites and costumes. They arent suppose to be taken seriously, ridiculous things happen throughout all the films. By plot holes I thought youd mean somthing that spoilt the enjoyment of the film.

You know like the deus ex machina type crap from van helsing when people appear out of nowhere swinging from ropes despite being outside with nothing for the ropes to hang on too. Or how Transylvania horses are suppose to be able to out run anything but then despite having massive head start the wearwolf guy magicaly appeared in front of them.